UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Stimulus properties : perceptual learning and their effect on disappearances of luminous figures Creighton, Terence Donald 1967

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1968_A8 C64.pdf [ 3.05MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0104328.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104328-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104328-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104328-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104328-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104328-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104328-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0104328-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0104328.ris

Full Text

STIMULUS PROPERTIES,  PERCEPTUAL  LEARNING AND THEIR EFFECT ON DISAPPEARANCES  OF LUMINOUS FIGURES  by  TERENCE DONALD CREIGHTON B» Com.,  University  A THESIS SUBMITTED  of B r i t i s h  C o l u m b i a , 1965  IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT  OF  THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS  i n t h e Department o f PSYCHOLOGY  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s as c o n f o r m i n g required  to the  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA December, 1967  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s  in p a r t i a l  f u l f i l m e n t of the  requirements  f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia,  that  the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r  Study.  I further  I agree  r e f e r e n c e and  agree that p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e  c o p y i n g of  this  t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head of my  Department or by hi.'s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s  w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n  Department of  permission.  Psychology  December 20,  i s understood t h a t  copying  t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d  The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Vancouver 8, Canada Date  It  Columbia  1967  i  ABSTRACT  Subjects viewed  luminous  t a r g e t s i n a dark room.  s i z e and composition were varied to determine s u b j e c t s ' r e p o r t s of complete of complete  r e t i n a l image i n c r e a s e d .  t h e i r e f f e c t on  f i g u r e disappearances.  t a r g e t disappearances  Target  The number  decreased as the s i z e of the  Fragmentations  r e l a t e d to meaning and  shape were also greatest under viewing c o n d i t i o n s i n v o l v i n g small r e t i n a l images.  Subjects showed no preference when they  were given the opportunity to respond  to e i t h e r shape of concep- •  t u a l s i m i l a r i t i e s i n the t a r g e t . P r i o r p e r c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g experiences were a l s o v a r i e d . Evidence f o r perceptual l e a r n i n g on a s p e c i f i c t a r g e t  (PPL) was  not found with s u b j e c t s who reported that they had astigmatism. P e r c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g was demonstrated  using e i t h e r a within-S or  between-5 design, and was found to decay meaningful t r a i n i n g s t i m u l i produced  r a p i d l y over time.  a greater degree  More  of l e a r n i n g .  Evidence f o r stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n was also found using a perceptual learning  exercise.  i i  TABLE  OF CONTENTS Page  ABSTRACT LIST  OF T A B L E S  LIST  OF F I G U R E S  i i  i  ±  i  v  ACKNOWLEDGMENT  v  INTRODUCTION METHOD AND R E S U L T S E x p e r i m e n t One: C o n c e p t u a l v e r s u s Shape Similarity E x p e r i m e n t Two: The E f f e c t o f T a r g e t S i z e E x p e r i m e n t T h r e e : The E f f e c t o f E x p e r i mental Design Experiment Four: Stimulus Generalization and P e r c e p t u a l L e a r n i n g Experiment F i v e : The R o l e o f t h e T r a i n i n g S t i m u l i and D u r a t i o n of Perceptual Learning  1  5 j_l j_3 j_6 20  SUMMARY OF R E S U L T S  26  DISCUSSION  28  REFERENCES  35  APPENDIX  3  9  i i i  LIST  OF  TABLES Page  TABLE  TABLE  TABLE  TABLE  TABLE  1.  2.  3.  4.  5.  Disappearance Categories Target  f o r Each 7  Mean Number o f S i m i l a r i t y D i s a p p e a r a n c e s f o r E a c h T a r g e t a n d Image S i z e  8  Mean Number o f S h a p e a n d C o n c e p t u a l D i s a p p e a r a n c e s f o r E a c h T a r g e t When Image S i z e i s C o m b i n e d  9  Mean Number o f D i s a p p e a r a n c e s f o r E a c h T a r g e t , Image S i z e , a n d Similarity Summary  of 5caling  Results  ...... 9 16  iv  LI5T OF FIGURES Page FIGURE 1. FIGURE 2.  P e r c e p t u a l Learning E f f e c t s Over Time f o r Two T r a i n i n g S t i m u l i Perceptual Learning E f f e c t s Over Time f o r Normal and Astigmatic Subjects  i *...  24 25  V  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS  The author wishes to acknowledge the l a r g e c o n t r i b u t i o n made to t h i s t h e s i s i n the form of advice, encouragement and c r i t i c i s m by Dr. Richard C. Tees and Dr. D.J. A l b e r t . A s s i s t a n c e on s p e c i f i c problems was  appreciated from  Dr. G.E.  MacKinnon, Dept. of Psychology, U n i v e r s i t y of Waterloo;  Dr. D.C.  Donderi, Dept. of Psychology, M c G i l l U n i v e r s i t y ;  CE.  Evans, N a t i o n a l P h y s i c a l Laboratory, Teddington, England;  Dr. A.M. S.M.  Dr.  Crooker, Dept. of Physics, U n i v e r s i t y of B.C.;  Drance, Dept. of Opthamology, U n i v e r s i t y of  Dr.  B.C.  S t a t i s t i c a l and s c a l i n g a s s i s t a n c e i s g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged from Dr. W. P e t r u s i c , Dr. R. Knox and Mr. A. T i n d a l l , all  of the Dept. of Psychology, and Miss L i n Cameron of the  S t a t i s t i c a l Center, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h  Columbia.  My thanks to Mr.'D.W. G o r n a l l and Mr. W. Handsworth Secondary 5 c h o o l ,  North Vancouver,  cooperative s u b j e c t s , and to Mr. W.E. of Schools, North  E. Brown of for providing  Lucas, Superintendent  Vancouver.  F i n a l l y , my thanks to Linda More, from whose work I have b e n e f i t e d so much, my parents, f o r t h e i r constant support, and to my  s i s t e r , Daphne, f o r her able typing  assistance.  INTRODUCTION  During normal v i s i o n , small i n v o l u n t a r y eye-movements provide a c o n s t a n t l y f l u c t u a t i n g r e t i n a l image ( R a t l i f f Riggs, 1950).  and  To study t h e i r e f f e c t on the v i s u a l process,  s e v e r a l techniques have been developed which e i t h e r  reduce,  e l i m i n a t e , or compensate f o r such eye-movements (reviewed by Heckenmueller,  1965).  These procedures  result in either a  p a r t i a l l y or completely s t a b i l i z e d r e t i n a l image. ver t y p i c a l l y r e p o r t s the disappearance such an image.  An  obser-  and fragmentation of  These f i n d i n g s l e d i n v e s t i g a t o r s to p o s t u l a t e  that eye-movements were necessary f o r the maintenance of perc e p t i o n , and that perception would f a i l  i f they were e l i m i n a -  ted. However, such a simple i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s subject to question.  There appears  to be q u a l i t a t i v e s i m i l a r i t y i n f l u c -  t u a t i o n s of perception when the image i s completely lized  (Evans, 1965,  stabilized 1962;  1966;  (Barlow, 1963;  stabi-  Evans and Drage, 1967), p a r t i a l l y C l a r k e , 1960;  Clarke and Belcher,  Evans and P i g g i n s , 1963), or under s i m p l i f i e d stimulus  c o n d i t i o n s when the image i s not s t a b i l i z e d and Evans, 1964;  McKinney, 1963,  at a l l (Clarke  1964).  When s i m p l i f i e d stimulus c o n d i t i o n s are used, subjects may  be asked to view t a r g e t s s l i g h t l y out of focus, or as  black l i n e f i g u r e s on a white background, or to f i x a t e on 1  2  luminous  t a r g e t s i n a dark room.  Investigations  employing  c o n d i t i o n s such as these enjoy s e v e r a l advantages:  special  preparation of the subject i s unnecessary, stimulus v a r i a b l e s are e a s i l y manipulated,  and the need f o r expensive or e l a b o r -  ate equipment i s avoided.  The important c o n s i d e r a t i o n  about  t h i s t e s t s i t u a t i o n i s that eye-movements are only reduced, not e l i m i n a t e d (5teinman,  1965;  Steinman ert _al. , 1967).  the disappearance phenomenon observed under reduced t i o n c o n d i t i o n s must not.be c o m p l t 3 t o l y  Thus  stimula-  dependent 'on i n v o l u n t a r y  eye-movoinnnts. Disappearances complex t a r g e t s .  have been compared f o r simple and more  As target complexity i n c r e a s e s , subjects r e -  port that the number of p a r t i a l disappearances observed i n creases.  Further, many of these fragmentations are non-random.  Target parameters  such as s i z e , meaningfulness  and complexity  seem to i n f l u e n c e the pattern of fragmentations (Bennet-Clark and Evans, 1963;  Evans, 1965,  Heron and Hebb, I960). or c o r t i c a l ,  1966;  MacKinnon, 1967;  Pritchard,  Hebb (1963) has suggested that  processes such as a t t e n t i o n and experience  i n f l u e n c e the kinds of disappearances observed.  central, may  His suggestion  that disappearances and fragmentations are the r e s u l t of cent r a l process i n h i b i t i o n  has l e d s e v e r a l i n v e s t i g a t o r s to use  s i m p l i f i e d stimulus techniques to study the r o l e of l e a r n i n g in perception.  Their basic assumption  i s that these c e n t r a l ,  neural processes develop as a r e s u l t of p e r c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g  3  (Hebb, 1949).  Consequently,  perceptual learning  should i n f l u e n c e disappearance  phenomenon.  Several i n v e s t i g a t o r s have been concerned of  response  Donderi stimuli, or  experiences  t r a i n i n g on disappearances  with the e f f e c t  of lumingus  stimuli.  and Kane (1965) found that d i s c r i m i n a b l y d i f f e r e n t given a common response  i n a p a i r e d - a s s o c i a t e task  i n stimulus r e c o g n i t i o n t r a i n i n g , faded or disappeared t o -  gether more f r e q u e n t l y than i f they had not been given the common response.  McKinney (1966),  on the other hand, demon-  s t r a t e d that the p e r c e p t u a l s t a b i l i t y  of a s i n g l e luminous  sti-  mulus changed when i t was a s s o c i a t e d with two d i f f e r e n t r e sponses.  Perceptual l e a r n i n g has also been demonstrated when  the responses  made during t r a i n i n g are i r r e l e v a n t to the  l e a r n i n g experience.  More (1967) found that d i s c r i m i n a b l y  d i f f e r e n t s t i m u l i , when presented contiguously a number of times, would disappear together s i g n i f i c a n t l y more often than they d i d before the t r a i n i n g  procedure.  The f i n d i n g s of More (1967), Donderi and Kane (1965) and McKinney (1966) have been taken as support f o r Hebb's (1949, 1963) theory of perceptual l e a r n i n g .  In t h i s theory i t i s as-  sumed that a p a r t i c u l a r stimulus w i l l e l i c i t s p e c i f i c group of c e l l s ,  the f i r i n g  of a  i . e . a cell-assembly, i n the a s s o c i a -  t i o n cortex (Brodmann's areas IB and 19).  I f two s t i m u l i are  presented together contiguously ( s p a t i a l l y  ond/or . t e m p o r a l l y ) ,  then a c e r t a i n overlap of c e l l - a s s e m b l i e s w i l l  occur.  Resis-  tance to s y n a p t i c transmission w i l l decrease i n the area of  4 overlap  as the number of j o i n t presentations  increase. j u s t one  A point can  be reached when the p r e s e n t a t i o n  of the s t i m u l i w i l l e l i c i t  assemblies.  of the s t i m u l i  the f i r i n g  of both  This f u n c t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n of neural  i s thought to c o n s t i t u t e the neural  substrate  of  of cell-  processes perceptual  learning. More (1967) provides Furthermore, Donderi and  strong  evidence f o r Hebb's  hypothesis.  Kane (1965) showed that the r e s u l t i n g  neural i n t e g r a t i o n , or phase-sequence, could be through the neural r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  established  of a common response.  McKinney (1966) demonstrated that phase sequences i n v o l v i n g s t i m u l i and  responses already  experience, and  e x i s t as a r e s u l t of  act to reduce perceptual  duced s t i m u l a t i o n  previous  fluctuations in a re-  condition.  To f i n d out more about v a r i a b l e s that i n f l u e n c e the of disappearance phenomenon observed, the present studies were undertaken.  s e r i e s of  Luminous t a r g e t parameters and  ceptual experiences were manipulated to determine t h e i r f e c t s on s u b j e c t s ' reports of t a r g e t  kinds  disappearances.  peref-  EXPERIMENT  ONE  Conceptual Versus Shape S i m i l a r i t y Several i n v e s t i g a t o r s have reported that  disappearance  a c t i v i t y of s i m i l a r or i d e n t i c a l shapes i s c o r r e l a t e d at an above chance l e v e l et a l . , 1960; 1966).  (Donderi, 1966;  Replogle, 1962;  McKinney, 1963;  Tees, 1961;  T a u s ' :md  Pritchard, Mora,  These f i n d i n g s have been i n t e r p r e t e d as p r o v i d i n g sup-  port f o r Hebb's (1949, 1963)  cell-assembly theory.  I f an  a s s o c i a t i o n theory such as Hebb's i s c o r r e c t , and i f l e a r n i n g i n f l u e n c e s p e r c e p t i o n , then s t i m u l i which are c o n c e p t u a l l y similar  ( i . e . s i m i l a r i n meaning) should disappear together i n  a manner analogous t h i s experiment, both i n concept  to the disappearance  of s i m i l a r shapes.  complex t a r g e t s whose elements were s i m i l a r and i n shape were presented to s u b j e c t s , and  t h e i r s u b j e c t i v e r e p o r t s were recorded. METHOD Subjects The Ss were 80 Grade 9 students at Handsworth Secondary School, North Vancouver, B.C.  with a median age of 14 years.  Apparatus The  apparatus  was  a (122 cm.  painted plywood which was  X 122  cm.)  sheet of b l a c k -  mounted v e r t i c a l l y on a t a b l e so  that i t s distance from an observer could be v a r i e d . screen had a 21.6  X 29 cm.  The  centered, cut-out hole so that 5  In  6 various  p l e x i g l a s s screens could be mounted i n the cut-out  portion.  The s t i m u l i were four luminous three-element  which were h o r i z o n t a l l y arranged and painted  targets  on 0.26 cm, t h i c k ,  screens of sprayed-black p l e x i g l a s s (pPB, PBb, rRB, b69). Each f i g u r e was 4.3 cm. high first  (except f o r the small p i n the  t a r g e t , which was 2.7 cm. high), 0.84 cm. t h i c k , and  the width of the three  f i g u r e s was 9.75 cm.  Each target was  chosen so that two of the elements were s i m i l a r i n form (e.g. PB, RB, b6) and two of the elements were s i m i l a r  conceptually  (e.g. pP, Bb, rR, 69). In a darkened room, Ss viewed the target with t h e i r dominant ( u s u a l l y r i g h t ) eye and covered t h e i r non-dominant eye with a p l a s t i c eye-patch.  In the small  target c o n d i t i o n , Ss viewed the target from a distance of 168 cm., and the v i s u a l angles subtended were 1.47 X 3.33 degrees.  In the l a r g e target c o n d i t i o n , the target was 91.5 cm.  from the observer and the subtended v i s u a l angles were 2.7 X 6.1 degrees. Procedure The  5s were randomly assigned to eight target  (four t a r g e t s , each t a r g e t viewed as a small and  were run i n d i v i d u a l l y .  groups  or l a r g e image)  Each group contained  10 s u b j e c t s .  Each S_ was seated i n f r o n t of the screen and asked to place the eye-patch over h i s non-dominant eye. A f t e r  recording  the S_'s name and age the f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s were "In f r o n t of you are three forms which w i l l glow i n the dark when I turn out the l i g h t . I want you to r e s t your head on your hands, and  given:  7 when I turn out the l i g h t , I want you to s t a r e at the middle part of the middle form. I f you do t h i s without moving and without b l i n k i n g any more than you have t o , the forms w i l l d i s appear. They may disappear one at a time, i n p a i r s , or a l l three together, and u s u a l l y reappear very q u i c k l y again. For the next f i v e minutes, I want you to t e l l me which of the forms are disappearing every time they do. Also, please t e l l me whether the forms disappear t o gether or i n d i v i d u a l l y . Please be sure to t e l l me only when the form has completely disappeared. Do not t e l l me i f only part of the form disappears, or i f i t fades but does not completely disappear. You may f i n d that the forms disappear and reappear q u i c k l y , so t r y to be as accurate i n your r e p o r t i n g as you can," The room was pearances  darkened,  and 5_'s r e p o r t s of complete  were recorded f o r f i v e  disap-  minutes.  RESULTS S's responses were d i v i d e d i n t o four c a t e g o r i e s : shape s i m i l a r i t y disappearances; conceptual s i m i l a r i t y ces;  f i x a t i o n disappearances; and complete  The disappearances Table 1.  disappearan-  disappearances.  assigned to each category are presented i n  A s i m i l a r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system  was  used by More  (19'67) Table 1 Disappearance Category Shape Conceptual Fixation Complete  Categories f o r Each Target  PBb  pPB PB or p _B or pP_ P_ or p_B  PB_ _Bb B  Target  or b or P or P b  rRB  _RB or r rR_ or B R~" or r B  b69 b  9 or b6_ or _69 6 or b 9  8 The frequency of disappearances i n each category f o r each subject are reported i n Table 1-1 i n the Appendix. To determine the e f f e c t of t a r g e t and image s i z e on the number of shape and conceptual disappearances, a 2 X 4 X 80 X 2 a n a l y s i s of variance was computed Appendix).  (see Table 1-2 i n the  The f o l l o w i n g i s a summary of the important  find-  ings : 1.  When t a r g e t s and s i z e s were combined, there was no d i f -  ference between the number of conceptual disappearances (X = 7.58) and the number of shape disappearances  (X = 6.26,  F< 1, df = 1,78). 2.  When conceptual and shape s i m i l a r i t y c o n d i t i o n s were  combined and when t a r g e t s were combined, there was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the number of s i m i l a r i t y between the small image c o n d i t i o n image c o n d i t i o n 3.  disappearances  (X = 9.41) and the l a r g e  (X = 6.26, F = 51.2, df = 1,66, p< . D l ) .  The number of conceptual and shape s a m i l a x i t y d i s a p -  pearances  was greater f o r the small image s i z e than f o r the  l a r g e image s i z e over a l l t a r g e t s  (see Table 2, F = 4.53,  df = 3,66, p <.01). Table 2 Mean Number of S i m i l a r i t y Disappearances Target and Image S i z e l  z  e  Small Large  pPB Shape Concept. 8.8 13.7 7.8 6.5  f o r Each  Target PBb rRB b69 Shape Concept. Shape Concept. Shape Concept. 5.6 6.2 10.1 6.3 13.4 11.2 4.8 5.4 6.0 5.2 8.3 6.1  9  4.  There was n s i g n i f i c a n t  d i f f e r e n c e between the four  t a r g e t s i n the number of s i m i l a r i t y disappearances when s i m i l a r i t y conditions  and image s i z e were combined (pPB:  X = 9.2; PBb: X = 5.5; rRB: X = 6.9; b69: X = 9.75; F = 20.39, df = 3,66, p <- .01). 5.  There was a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between the number  of conceptual disappearances and the number of shape disappearances  f o r each t a r g e t  (see Table 3; F = 5.43, df - 3,66,  p < . 01) . Table 3 Mean Number of Shape and Conceptual Disappearances f o r Each Target When Image Size i s Combined Target Shape Conceptual 6.  pPB 8.3 10.1  PBb 5.2 5.8  xvRB 8.05 5.75  b69 10.85 8.65  There was a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between t a r g e t ,  image s i z e and the number of shape disappearances and conceptual disappearances  (see Table 4; F = 4.82, df = 3,66,  p < .01) . Table 4 Mean Number of Disappearances f o r Each Target, Image 5 i z e and S i m i l a r i t y Size  Target pPB PBb rRB b69 Shape Concept. Shape Concept. Shape Concept. Shape Concept.  Small 8.8 Large 7.8  13.7 6.5  5.6 4.8  6.2 5.4  10.1 6.0  6.3 5.2  13.4 8.3  11.2 6.1  10 To determine whether image s i z e a f f e c t e d the number of fixation  or complete  disappearances, two 2 X 4  variances were computed. of f i x a t i o n X = 5.20)  disappearances  but there was  df = 1,72,  There was  no d i f f e r e n c e i n the number  (small image: X = 5.28;  a significant  difference  p< .02) i n the number of complete  (small image: X = 12.9;  dominant, a simple binomial t e s t was  assumed that the p r o b a b i l i t i e s  i t y were equal ( i . e . 0.5).  (p<0.21).  5.33,  (shape or meaning)  computed on the condition.  f o r each type of  Shape s i m i l a r i t y dominated  times out of e i g h t , but t h i s was from chance  (F =  disappearances  s i m i l a r i t y means f o r each target i n each viewing It was  l a r g e image:  l a r g e image: X = 8.65).  To determine which type of s i m i l a r i t y was  analyses of  not s i g n i f i c a n t l y  similarfive  different  EXPERIMENT TWO The Experiment  E f f e c t of Target Size  One suggested  that the s i z e of the r e t i n a l  image w i l l a f f e c t the type of disappearances subject.  In t h i s experiment,  reported by a  r e t i n a l image was held constant  while t a r g e t s i z e was v a r i e d .  METHOD Subj ects The  5s were 5 Grade 9 students at Handsworth Secondary  School, with a median age of 14 years, and 15  undergraduate  volunteers from the U n i v e r s i t y of B . C . , with a median age of 20 years.  The undergraduates  were d i v i d e d i n t o two groups at  random: one group of 5 with a median age of 20 years; the other group of 10 with a median age of 20.5 years. Apparatus The periment  viewing c o n d i t i o n s were i d e n t i c a l to those of ExOne. B o t h t a r g e t s were the l e t t e r s PPL.  In one t a r -  get the t r i a d was 4.3 cm. high and 9.7 cm. wide, and when i t was viewed from  91 cm. away the t a r g e t subtended 11  visual  angles  12 of 2.7 X 6.1 deg.  In the other t a r g e t , the three l e t t e r s were  7.6 cm. high and 18.6 cm. wide, and when i t was viewed 153 cm. away the target subtended  from  the same v i s u a l angles.  Procedure The procedure was the same as f o r Experiment undergraduates  viewed  One.  Ten  the small t a r g e t and 5 school c h i l d r e n  and 5 undergraduates  viewed  the l a r g e t a r g e t .  Results Disappearances gories:  were recorded and d i v i d e d i n t o four c a t e -  L and PP__ were regarded as evidence f o r i d e n t i c a l  p a i r disappearances; _PL and P  as d i f f e r e n t p a i r disappear-  ances; _P__ and P_J_ as f i x a t i o n disappearances, and ____ as comp l e t e disappearances. The r e s u l t s are presented i n Table 2-1 i n the Appendix. To determine  the e f f e c t of target s i z e , four 2 X 20 analyses  of variance were computed. found  No s i g n i f i c a n t  d i f f e r e n c e s were  (see Table 2-2 i n Appendix). Four 2 X 10 analyses of variance were computed to deter-  mine the e f f e c t of 5_s ages on disappearances.  The 14 year-  old Ss reported more " f i x a t i o n " disappearances  (X = 14.6) than  1  did the 20 y e a r - o l d 5s (X = 4.0; F = 6.4, df = 1,8; p < . 0 5 ) . None of the other comparisons in  Appendix).  were s i g n i f i c a n t  (see Table 2-3  EXPERIMENT THREE The E f f e c t  of Experimental Design  More (1967) demonstrated a perceptual l e a r n i n g using a w i t h i n - s u b j e c t s experimental design. viewed a luminous t a r g e t  effect  Subjects f i r s t  (e.g. "GGR") f o r f i v e minutes.  They  were then given a c o n t r o l l e d perceptual l e a r n i n g experience i n which the l e t t e r - p a i r  "GR" was embedded 60 times i n 100 s l i d e s ,  each of which contained words of 3 to B l e t t e r s .  F i n a l l y , the  subjects were exposed to the luminous target f o r a second f i v e minute t e s t .  Evidence f o r perceptual l e a r n i n g was an i n c r e a s e  i n the number of "GR" paired disappearances from the p r e - l e a r n ing  to the p o s t - l e a r n i n g  situation.  One could argue that t h i s i n c r e a s e was due i n some way to greater f a m i l i a r i t y with the t a r g e t . p a r t i a l l y answered  This c r i t i c i s m was  by Tees and More (1966) who found that  iden-  tical=pair  ("GG") disappearances increased as f a m i l i a r i t y of  the  ("GGR") i n c r e a s e d .  target  A more complete answer to the  argument i s provided i n the present experiment, employing a between-subjects design i n which each subject i s exposed to the t a r g e t only  once. METHOD  Subj ects The Ss used as the c o n t r o l group were the same as those used i n the "Large PPL" group Two.  (2.7 X 6.1 deg.) i n Experiment  Subjects i n the experimental group were 10 undergraduate 13  14 volunteers from the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia with a median age of 24 y e a r s . Apparatus The apparatus was A 21.8  X 28 cm.  l a r g e plywood hundred  s i m i l a r to that used i n Experiment  ground glass screen was  screen so that i t was  One.  i n s e r t e d i n t o the  91 cm.  from the S.  One  s l i d e s , each c o n t a i n i n g 3 to 9 h o r i z o n t a l l y arranged  random l e t t e r s were a u t o m a t i c a l l y projected onto the screen by a Kodak Carousel p r o j e c t o r f o r 5 seconds. cm.  degrees.  The l a r g e s t t a r g e t  tended an angle of 14.3 t e r s ) an angle of 4.7  degrees.  (PL) were  The s l i d e s were randomly presentThe luminous t a r g e t ,  viewed at a d i s t a n c e of 153 cm., X 6.1  sub-*  (i.e. 3 let-  The t r a i n i n g s t i m u l i  (See Table 3-1 i n Appendix).  angles of 1.7  (i.e. 9 letters)  degrees, and the smallest  embedded i n 60 of the s l i d e s .  was  4.3  high and about 2.5 cm. wide, subtending a v i s u a l angle of  2.7 X 1.6  ed.  Each l e t t e r was  and subtended  PPL,  visual  degrees.  Procedure The S_s i n the c o n t r o l group followed the same procedure as described i n Experiment One.  Ss i n the l e a r n i n g  condition  were asked to s i t f a c i n g the ground glass screen i n a dimly lit eye.  room and to place the eye-patch over t h e i r non-dominant They were then given the f o l l o w i n g  instructions:  15  "For the next s e v e r a l minutes, I w i l l be showing you s e v e r a l s l i d e s . Each s l i d e contains a number of l e t t e r s of the alphabet. Your task i s simply to t e l l me whether the l e t t e r "P" appears on a s l i d e or not. If the s l i d e contains any "P's" say "Yes". I f i t doesn't, say "No". The s l i d e s ject  were then presented a u t o m a t i c a l l y to the sub-  such that 60 of the 100 s l i d e s  contained one "P",  every time a "P" appeared, an "L" was j e c t was the  paired with i t .  allowed to r e l a x f o r two minutes and then was  and The  sub-  given  i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r viewing the luminous target as described  i n Experiment One. •letter  The room was  darkened, and Ss reports of complete  disappearances were recorded f o r f i v e minutes.  Results Disappearances were c a t e g o r i z e d as was dure of Experiment Two. in the Appendix.  The r e s u l t s are presented i n Table 3-2  The d i f f e r e n c e between the number of i d e n t i c a l  disappearances and the number of d i f f e r e n t c a l c u l a t e d f o r each s u b j e c t . ed  done i n the proce-  disappearances was  An independent t - t e s t  was  comput-  comparing that d i f f e r e n c e between the c o n t r o l group and the  l e a r n i n g group. 3.09,  The comparison was  highly s i g n i f i c a n t  (t =  df = 18; p<.005 o n e - t a i l ) which supported the perceptual  learning  hypothesis,  EXPERIMENT FOUR  Stimulus G e n e r a l i z a t i o n and Perceptual Learning  Thompson (1965b) defined stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n as "...the tendency of organisms to respond  to s t i m u l i other  than  the o r i g i n a l conditioned stimulus i n the absence of d i f f e r e n t i a l training..."  (p. 154).  5tudies showing stimulus  generali-  z a t i o n have often used sensory p r e c o n d i t i o n i n g as a v e h i c l e (Thompson, 1959,  1965a; Kendall and Thompson, I960) suggest-  ing that stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n i s c o n s i s t e n t with a model of l e a r n i n g .  5-5  Thompson (1965b) proposed a neural basis  f o r stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n and derived the f o l l o w i n g hypothesis: "Assuming that (1) a r e l a t i v e l y s t a b l e measure of g e n e r a l i z a t i o n i s used, (2) some degree of l e a r n ing to the t r a i n i n g stimulus has occurred, and (3) d r i v e l e v e l i s held constant, the amount of b e h a v i o r a l stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n given by an organism to a t e s t stimulus i s a monotonic ( l i n ear?) i n c r e a s i n g f u n c t i o n of the degree of overlap of e x c i t a t i o n i n the c e r e b r a l cortex r e s u l t ing from t r a i n i n g and t e s t s t i m u l i . " (Thompson, 1966b; p. 158-159). If disappearances  of luminous f i g u r e s could be used as an  index of perceptual l e a r n i n g , and i f perceptual l e a r n i n g i s subject to stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n , then changes i n  disappearance  patterns on one t a r g e t r e s u l t i n g from previous t r a i n i n g on a s i m i l a r t a r g e t should i n d i c a t e the extent of stimulus lization  i n perceptual l e a r n i n g .  would also be strong support ing  Confirmation of t h i s  generahypothesis  f o r a " c e n t r a l " mechanism, mediat-  disappearances. 16  17 METHOD Subj ects The Ss were 30 undergraduate volunteers at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia  with a median age of 21 y e a r s .  Apparatus The apparatus was s i m i l a r to that used i n Experiment  Three  except that two a d d i t i o n a l luminuous t a r g e t s were used, PPI, and PPE, each the same s i z e as the PPL target used i n E x p e r i ment Three. Procedure The S_s were randomly assigned to three groups of 10 and were run i n d i v i d u a l l y .  The same procedure as that >of More  (1967) was used, since Experiment Three i n d i c a t e d that a w i t h i n 5 design was v a l i d . appearance  The c o n t r o l group was f i r s t  given the d i s -  i n s t r u c t i o n s as reported i n Experiment One, and then  reported disappearances of the PPL t a r g e t f o r f i v e  minutes.  A f t e r a b r i e f r e s t p e r i o d , they were given the s l i d e  instructions  and observed the same s e r i e s of s l i d e s as reported i n E x p e r i ment Three. five  They then reported disappearances of PPL again f o r  minutes. The two experimental groups were t r e a t e d i n the same  manner, except that p r i o r to t h e i r entering the l a b o r a t o r y , they were asked to f i l l Appendix).  out a questionnaire (see E x h i b i t 1 i n the  For the G e n e r a l i z a t i o n Level One (Gen. 1) group,  18 the l e t t e r they ranked as most s i m i l a r to "L" i n shape i n box Number 1 of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was used i n place of "L" i n the luminous t a r g e t .  For the G e n e r a l i z a t i o n Level Two  (Gen. 2) group, the l e t t e r they ranked as second most s i m i l a r i n shape to "L" was used. Results The r e s u l t s of the s c a l i n g procedure f o r the two e x p e r i mental groups are presented i n Table 4-1 i n the Appendix.  The  rank each subject assigned to each l e t t e r i n terms of i t s shape s i m i l a r i t y to "L" was l i s t e d below that l e t t e r . l i s t s were summed, and the stimulus I - s c a l e  The  (Coombs, 1964) was  a ranking of the sums from lowest to h i g h e s t .  L e t t e r s with a  low sum are presumed to be s i m i l a r to "L", l e t t e r s with a high sum are d i s s i m i l a r to "L". The Table i s broken down by experimental group, and within each experimental group, by l e t t e r s u b s t i t u t e d f o r "L" i n the luminous t a r g e t . l u s I - s c a l e s and the c o e f f i c i e n t s of concordance 1963;  p. 656) are summarized  The stimu-  (Hays,  i n Table 5 below.  Table 5 Summary of S c a l i n g Gen. Level 1 2 Combined  Stimulus I-Scale I,T,E,D,A,M,G T,I,E,D,A,M,G I,T,E,D,A,M,G  Results  Coefficient concordance .782 .827 .785  Chi-square df = 6  Prob.  46.92 49.62 94.20  <.001 ^.001 <.001  19 The hypothesis that there was  no agreement between sub-  j e c t s i n t h e i r rankings of l e t t e r s according to shape s i m i l a r i ty to "L" was rejected  t e s t e d using a Chi-square approximation,  i n a l l three cases  (see Table 5).  and  was  In f a c t , the  c o e f f i c i e n t s of concordance i n d i c a t e a high agreement between subj e c t s . The  disappearances  were recorded and c l a s s i f i e d  manner reported i n Experiment sented i n Table 4-2 Evidence  Two,  and the r e s u l t s are pre-  i n the Appendix.  f o r perceptual l e a r n i n g i n each group was  found when c o r r e l a t e d t - t e s t s were performed of d i f f e r e n c e s . ance was  on the  not  difference  However, a one-way 3 X 30 a n a l y s i s of v a r i -  computed  (see Table 4-3  i n the Appendix) which y i e l d e d  a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t due to treatment p<.05).  i n the  (F = 3.85,  df -  2,27,  An orthogonal comparison between the c o n t r o l group  and the two  generalization  df = 27, p< .01 o n e - t a i l ) . (see Table 4-4  s i g n i f i c a n t (t -  A trend a n a l y s i s was  2.63,  computed  i n the Appendix) which i n d i c a t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t  l i n e a r trend ( F = 7.40, generalization  groups was  df = 1,27,  hypothesis.  p<.025), supporting the  EXPERIMENT FIVE  The Role of the T r a i n i n g S t i m u l i and Duration of P e r c e p t u a l Learning Melton long-term  (1963),  concluded  memory (LTM)  that short-term memory (STM)  and  are points on the same continuum.  "My preference i s f o r a t h e o r e t i c a l s t r a t e g y that accepts STM and LTM as mediated by a s i n g l e type of storage mechanism. In such a continuum, f r e quency of r e p e t i t i o n appears to be the important independent v a r i a b l e , "chunking" seems to be the important i n t e r v e n i n g v a r i a b l e , and the slope of the r e t e n t i o n curve i s the important dependent v a r i a b l e . " (Melton, 1 9 6 3 ; p. 1 9 ) . The storage mechanism suggested cell-assembly theory  (Hebb, 1 9 4 9 ,  i s s i m i l a r to Hebb's  1961).  The  e f f e c t of r e -  p e t i t i o n i n such a theory would be to i n c r e a s e the number and/or s t r e n g t h of c e l l - a s s e m b l i e s r e l a t i n g to a given  per-  c e p t i o n ; thereby reducing the decay r a t e of performance over time c h a r a c t e r i s t i c to most l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n s . u n i t s , i . e . fewer "chunks" of information ( M i l l e r ,  Meaningful 1956),  a l s o r e s u l t i n l e s s r a p i d decay (Underwood and Schulz, One  I960).  e f f e c t of r e p e t i t i o n i s to reduce the number of "chunks"  of i n f o r m a t i o n i n complex s t i m u l i , thereby f a c i l i t a t i n g i n formation processing ( p o s s i b l y through  the formation of  more complex c e l l - a s s e m b l i e s ) . At l e a s t four p r e d i c t i o n s can be made from Melton's paper i n terms of the present s e r i e s of s t u d i e s i f perceptual l e a r n i n g f o l l o w s the same r u l e s of memory as do other t h e o r i e s of l e a r n i n g : 20  21 1.  Presenting the l e t t e r p a i r "PL" embedded i n  nonsense s y l l a b l e s during t r a i n i n g should in  little  of  the r e t e n t i o n c u r v e ) .  2.  result  STM (as measured i n terms of the decay  Presenting the l e t t e r p a i r "PL" embedded i n proper  words should r e s u l t i n increased STM because of i n creased 3.  meaningfulness.  Presenting a more meaningful  as determined  by frequency  l e t t e r p a i r (e.g.  of occurrence  i n the E n g l i s h  language) embedded i n the t r a i n i n g s t i m u l i should i n crease STM. 4.  Increasing the number of c r i t i c a l l e t t e r p a i r r e -  p e t i t i o n s i n the t r a i n i n g procedure  should i n c r e a s e  STM. The l a s t  p r e d i c t i o n has been confirmed  (More, 1967).  Results concerning the t h i r d p r e d i c t i o n are somewhat  arbi-  t r a r y due to d i f f i c u l t y i n d e f i n i n g "meaningfulness".  The  present study i s an attempt to t e s t the f i r s t An important  two p r e d i c t i o n s .  consequence i s that data f o r the decay of per-  c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g over time w i l l be provided. METHOD Subj ects The Ss were 27 undergraduate volunteers from the Univers i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia with a median age of 24 years. of  the Ss comprised  the c o n t r o l group i n Experiment  Ten  Four.  22 Apparatus The apparatus was the same as that used i n Experiment Three, with the exception that f o r one group of Ss, the t r a i n ing s l i d e s were words (see Table 5-1 i n Appendix). Procedure The group presented with "PL" embedded i n the nonsense s y l l a b l e s was the c o n t r o l group i n Experiment procedure i s described i n that s e c t i o n .  Four, and the  The procedure f o r  the 17 Ss t r a i n e d on "PL" embedded i n words was the same except that the i n s t r u c t i o n s f o r viewing the t r a i n i n g  stimuli  were changed t o : "For the next s e v e r a l minutes I w i l l be showing you several s l i d e s . Each s l i d e contains an E n g l i s h word. Some of the words have been d e l i b e r a t e l y m i s p e l l e d . Your task i s simply to t e l l me i f each word i s c o r r e c t l y s p e l l e d or not. I f the word i s s p e l l e d c o r r e c t l y , say "yes"; i f i t i s wrong, say "no". P r i o r to viewing the luminous  t a r g e t , a l l 17 Ss were asked  i f they had astigmatism or other v i s u a l  deficiencies.  Results Four of the 17 Ss reported that they had astigmatism, and t h e i r data were analyzed s e p a r a t e l y . recorded i n 30 second  Disappearances  were  blocks c a t e g o r i z e d i n the usual manner,  and appear i n the Appendix, Table 4-2 f o r the nonsense s y l l a ble group,  and Table 5-2 f o r the word group.  It should be  r e c a l l e d that evidence f o r perceptual l e a r n i n g was not found  23 f o r the nonsense s y l l a b l e group. astigmatic  subjects  The word group, when the  were removed, had a mean d i f f e r e n c e of  d i f f e r e n c e s of 3.54 which i n d i c a t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t perceptual l e a r n i n g e f f e c t (t «:2.91, df =12; p <. . 01) . ference  of d i f f e r e n c e s f o r the astigmatic  The mean d i f -  Ss was -9.25.  The d i f f e r e n c e of d i f f e r e n c e s over time f o r each S_ i s presented i n Table 5-3 i n the Appendix.  The mean d i f f e r e n c e  of d i f f e r e n c e s f o r the s y l l a b l e groups and the word groups (excluding  astigmatics)  over time are presented i n Figure 1.  There was no o v e r a l l d i f f e r e n c e between the two groups i n t h e i r mean d i f f e r e n c e of d i f f e r e n c e s there  (t = .406, df = 21); nor were  any s i g n i f i c a n t trend e f f e c t s . The mean d i f f e r e n c e of d i f f e r e n c e s f o r the word group,  astigmatics Figure  2.  and non-astigmatics, over time are presented i n The f a i l u r e of astigmatic  a perceptual  subjects  l e a r n i n g e f f e c t i s evident.  to demonstrate  24  FIGURE  1.  PERCEPTUAL TIME  FOR  L E A R N I N G EFFECTS TWO  TRAINING  OVER  STIMULI  FIGURE  2.  PERCEPTUAL TIME  FOR  SUBJECTS  LEARNING  NORMAL  AND  EFFECTS  OVER  ASTIGMATIC  26 SUMMARY OF RESULTS The r e s u l t s of t h i s paper may be broadly c l a s s e d  into  two c a t e g o r i e s : those r e s u l t s p e r t a i n i n g to the stimulus f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g disappearances  of luminous  f i g u r e s ; and those  r e s u l t s p e r t a i n i n g to the l e a r n i n g f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g d i s a p pearances . A.  Stimulus Factors  1.  The smaller the r e t i n a l angle subtended,  number of complete 2.  and s i m i l a r i t y  Varying t a r g e t s i z e produces  the greater the  disappearances. no s i g n i f i c a n t  change i n  the number of disappearances i n each category. 3.  Disappearances  r e l a t e d to s i m i l a r i t y of shape occur as  f r e q u e n t l y as conceptual s i m i l a r i t y disappearances, but the r e l a t i o n s h i p can be a f f e c t e d by the p a r t i c u l a r t a r g e t and the r e t i n a l angle 4.  used  subtended.  Younger subjects show more f i x a t i o n disappearances  than  do o l d e r s u b j e c t s . B,  Learning Factors  1.  Using target PPL, evidence f o r p e r c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g  be found i n s u b j e c t s with 2.  astigmatism.  The e f f e c t s of the p e r c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g e x e r c i s e employed  decay 3.  cannot  r a p i d l y over time.  Perceptual l e a r n i n g can be demonstrated  between-5 or within-S design.  using e i t h e r a  27  4.  The p a r t i c u l a r  determining meaningful  stimuli  t h e amount  of perceptual  the stimuli,  the greater  5.  The d a t a  may  generalize  alization  training  indicate  that  to stimuli  gradient  used  learning; the  the perceptual similar  i s a linear  play  t h e more  learning. learning  i n shape,  function.  a role i n  and t h e  training gener-  28  DISCUSSION The  present experiments  were undertaken  to provide i n f o r -  mation concerning v a r i a b l e s which i n f l u e n c e the disappearance of f i g u r e s reported by subjects i n a s i m p l i f i e d  stimulus  dition.  with the t a r g e t  Experiments  One and Two were concerned  parameters image s i z e , t a r g e t s i z e , and the p a r t i c u l a r chosen.  In the l a s t three experiments,  con-  letters  several variables  were examined which previous s t u d i e s suggested  would i n f l u e n c e  perceptual l e a r n i n g . In Experiment  One, s i m i l a r i t y of shape and s i m i l a r i t y of  meaning were opposed to t e s t an a s s o c i a t i o n theory of perceptual learning  (Hebb, 1949, 1963).  5uch a theory would p r e d i c t that  pre-school s u b j e c t s , who are u n f a m i l i a r with meaningful between l e t t e r s  relations  (e.g. that a "b" and a "B" mean the same), would  report a preponderance of shape s i m i l a r i t y disappearances.  As a  r e s u l t of cumulative experience with various shapes and s i z e s of l e t t e r s and with meanings of various l e t t e r combinations, 1  older  subjects should have reported an equivalent number of shape and meaning s i m i l a r i t y disappearances. confirmed  i n the present  This l a t t e r p r e d i c t i o n was  study.  I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the r e s u l t s of Experiment  One must be made  with c a u t i o n , s i n c e there was a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r a c t i o n between targets.  Although  the i n t e n t was to equate each t a r g e t f o r shape and  conceptual s i m i l a r i t y , such an equivalence was not achieved. For example, a "B" may look l i k e a "P", but are they s i m i l a r i n shape?  Furthermore,  actually  i n one t a r g e t (pPB), the  p r o b a b i l i t y of the small "p" disappearing was greater than the p r o b a b i l i t y of the other two l e t t e r s d i s a p p e a r i n g .  This  29 may  have been due to the discrepancy i n the s i z e s of the  ters. was  let-  Hence, the i s s u e of conceptual versus shape s i m i l a r i t y  not r e s o l v e d i n the present study.  A promising  would be to s e l e c t the t a r g e t s i n such a way i s p r e - s c a l e d , and thereby equated,  approach  that each element  f o r form and meaning.  This  would provide a more s e n s i t i v e measure of p e r c e p t u a l a s s o c i a tions . A post hoc comparison of the data was nal image s i z e s . disappearances  (means of 9.41  This l a t t e r f i n d i n g was One  reti-  With a small r e t i n a l image, more " s i m i l a r i t y " vs. 6.26  and more complete disappearances  1966).  made f o r two  f o r the l a r g e r image)  (12.9  vs. 8.65)  were r e p o r t e d .  s i m i l a r to data c o l l e c t e d by Evans (1965,  explanation f o r these f i n d i n g s i s that a smaller  image i s more l i k e l y to f a l l w i t h i n fewer f o v e a l r e c e p t i v e f i e l d s than the l a r g e r r e t i n a l image. r e l a t e d to r e t i n a l Wiesel, 1962, Q  (Granit, 1955)  1965)  In Experiment  or c o r t i c a l  (Hubel  receptive f i e l d s i s d i f f i c u l t Two,  image s i z e constant. reason f o r any  Whether the e f f e c t i s  t a r g e t s i z e was  d i f f e r e n c e s i n disappearance  s i n c e image s i z e was  constant, i t was  to.'determine.  v a r i e d while  While there should be no  and  keeping  physiological  phenomenon to occur  thought  that a l a r g e r  t a r g e t would allow the subject greater ease i n f i x a t i n g .  The  e f f e c t of t h i s ease of f i x a t i o n would be to i n c r e a s e the number of disappearances  reported.  The r e s u l t s were i n t h i s  although the d i f f e r e n c e s did not a t t a i n s i g n i f i c a n c e . data was  reported by MacKinnon  (1967).  direction, Similar  30 While f i x a t i o n disappearances are excluded from a n a l y s i s i n most of t h i s study, i t was observed that younger subjects (14 years  old) reported  a greater number of f i x a t i o n  pearances (X = 14.6) than d i d 20 year o l d subjects  disap-  (X = 4.0),  These younger subjects may show e i t h e r a greater a b i l i t y to f i x a t e according  to the i n s t r u c t i o n s or be able to concentrate  f o r longer periods  on the f i x a t i o n  point.  Experiments Three, Four and Five were concerned with  per-  c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g and some of the v a r i a b l e s i n f l u e n c i n g i t s strength.  To demonstrate a sensory-sensory a s s o c i a t i o n , i t i s  important that no r e l e v a n t responses be made to the s t i m u l i . That i s , the subject must make no v e r b a l or overt response to P and L. and  Otherwise, the a s s o c i a t i o n s could be 5-R or S-R-R-S,  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s could not be r e s t r i c t e d to a 5-S model. For  t h i s reason the p a r t i c u l a r task employed during the perceptual t r a i n i n g procedure i s c r i t i c a l .  In Experiments Three and  Four, subjects viewed a series- of s l i d e s c o n t a i n i n g random l e t t e r s and were asked to say "yes" i f the s l i d e contained a "P" and "no" i f i t d i d not.  C l e a r l y , the v e r b a l response made  i s i r r e l e v a n t to the "P-L" p a i r i n g i n the t r a i n i n g  stimuli.  In Experiment F i v e , the task was to say "yes" i f there were s p e l l i n g mistakes i n a s e r i e s of s l i d e s c o n t a i n i n g words, and "no" i f there were not.  This response i s a l s o i r -  r e l e v a n t to the "PL" p a i r i n g which occurred training The  English  i n 60$ of the  slides. tasks used were a l s o important i n that they were an  attempt to c o n t r o l f o r the d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t s of a t t e n t i o n  31 (Donderi and Kane, 1965; Hart, 1964). mistakes,  By l o o k i n g f o r s p e l l i n g  i t i s assumed that a t t e n t i o n w i l l be spread  over a l l t r a i n i n g s t i m u l i .  More (1967) used t h i s  equally  training  task and reported that a f t e r casual questioning f o l l o w i n g the experiment, most subjects s a i d they were unaware of the t r a i n ing l e t t e r p a i r  (GR) i n the t r a i n i n g procedure.  Five of the present  study,  In Experiment  f i v e out of seventeen subjects r e -  ported they noticed the "PL" p a i r i n g i n the t r a i n i n g  stimuli.  Thus, i t appears t h i s method may c o n t r o l a t t e n t i o n to an ext e n t , but i t does not n e c e s s a r i l y e l i m i n a t e i t s e f f e c t s . ever, the e f f e c t s of a t t e n t i o n seem, i f anything, against perceptual l e a r n i n g .  How-  to work  The mean d i f f e r e n c e of d i f f e r e n c e s  f o r subjects who noticed the p a i r i n g was 2.8, while i t was 3.5 f o r the e n t i r e group (excluding a s t i g m a t i c s ) . Another attempt to c o n t r o l a t t e n t i o n was the employment of the task i n which the subject was i n s t r u c t e d to look f o r "P's".  In t h i s case, the assumption was that a t t e n t i o n was  d i r e c t e d to a p a r t i c u l a r stimulus the stimulus p a i r  (PL). The success  determined i n the present r e s u l t s presented  (P) and t h e r e f o r e away from of t h i s procedure was not  s e r i e s of s t u d i e s .  i n Figure 1 suggest  However, the  that there were no d i f -  ferences i n the amount of perceptual l e a r n i n g produced by e i t h e r task. In Experiment Three, evidence was obtained  f o r perceptual l e a r n i n g  using a between-subject design.  In a w i t h i n -  subject design, perceptual l e a r n i n g must overcome a strong  32 trend  f o r i d e n t i c a l - p a i r disappearances to i n c r e a s e  posures to the same target blem i s not  (Tees and  More, 1966),  consideration  expect an enhanced " l e a r n i n g " e f f e c t .  favouring  the use  f o r demonstrating perceptual  of a w i t h i n - s u b j e c t s  sumably adopts his own In a w i t h i n - s u b j e c t s  A design  Each subject  c r i t e r i o n for reporting  paradigm, each subject  pre-  disappearances.  i s compared with  and  could  A between-subjects design l a c k s t h i s con-  therefore  show i n f l a t e d l e a r n i n g e f f e c t s as  have been demonstrated i n the present study. In Experiment Four, there  degree of stimulus ing.  was  and  a l i n e a r r e l a t i o n between  g e n e r a l i z a t i o n and  This f i n d i n g i s c o n s i s t e n t  pothesis, the  one  thereby c o n t r o l l i n g f o r the d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t s of  reporting c r i t e r i a .  may  pro-  l e a r n i n g concerns i n d i v i d u a l  d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e p o r t i n g disappearances.  trol,  This  ex-  encountered i n the between-subject design and  would t h e r e f o r e  himself,  over  suggests that S-S  amount of perceptual  with Thompson's (1965b) hya s s o c i a t i o n l e a r n i n g may  same l e a r n i n g parameters as does S-R  search,  i n v o l v i n g t r a n s f e r and  learn-  learning.  have  Further  re-  mediation paradigms, f o r example,  must be done to t e s t t h i s suggestion. Experiment Five was  an a p p l i c a t i o n of perceptual  learning  evidence obtained from luminous f i g u r e data to the area of short-term memory. f o r STM  The  proposition  evidence  would be obtained with i n c r e a s i n g l y meaningful t r a i n -  ing s t i m u l i was  t e s t e d and  since there was  not  supported.  The  support i s tenuous  a s t a t i s t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e between the  meaningfulness (X = 2.70) 3.54).  that increased  and  low  high meaningfulness groups (X =  33 There was  a r a p i d decay of the l e a r n i n g e f f e c t .  contiguous presentations favourable to STM not  appreciably  therefore, t h i s may  that  of "P"  " L " under  and  conditions  w i l l produce r e l i a b l e l e a r n i n g  more than s i x t y seconds. association  Sixty  effects for  It would seem,  learning i s i n e f f i c i e n t .  While  be so, i t cannot be i n f e r r e d from the present data,  s i n c e the l e a r n i n g  e f f e c t must overcome the strong i d e n t i c a l -  p a i r s e f f e c t (Tees and  More, 1966).  attention  fatigue increases,  d e c l i n e , and  posure to the target  increases  Also, motivation  beyond one  experiment would be to increase and  observe whether the l e a r n i n g  the  first  the  as length minute.  and  of An  exobvious  number of t r a i n i n g t r i a l s  e f f e c t becomes greater  s i x t y seconds, or whether the decay f u n c t i o n  in be-  comes more d i f f u s e , or both. A general comment concerning the three experiments should be made.  r e s u l t s of the  In no case were r e s u l t s  obtained which showed such c l e a r - c u t l e a r n i n g those achieved by More (1967). f o r perceptual one  l e a r n i n g was  case there was  learning.  not  e f f e c t s as  In many cases, the  j u s t barely  evidence  s i g n i f i c a n t , and  a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t due  This reduced l e a r n i n g  last  to  perceptual  e f f e c t occurred even though  s i m i l a r procedures to those used by More (1967) were ployed.  For  em-  Probably the most c r u c i a l d i f f e r e n c e between  procedures was  in  the p a r t i c u l a r target  used (PPL  vs.  the  GGR).  example, the r e s u l t s of Experiment Five show that a s t i g -  matic subjects  have a s i g n i f i c a n t increase  in i d e n t i c a l -  34  p a i r e d disappearances with PPL from p r e - to p o s t - t e s t difference strong,  of d i f f e r e n c e s  was - 9 . 2 5 ) .  and works against  The e f f e c t  a perceptual l e a r n i n g  is  (mean very  hypothesis.  "Lines i n d i f f e r e n t d i r e c t i o n s are not seen with equal d i s t i n c t n e s s by an astigmatic eye. I f the astigmatism i s high c e r t a i n parts of an object are b l u r r e d out e n t i r e l y , " (Cowen, 1948, p. 188), The astigmatic  e f f e c t would be magnified by having  s t a r e at a luminous target  for five  minutes.  subjects  If the  astig-  matism were o r i e n t e d i n a v e r t i c a l and h o r i z o n t a l d i r e c t i o n (as occurs with compound hypermetropic astigmatism) "L" i n a "PPL" would be expected thereby working against  to disappear more o f t e n ,  a learning effect.  When  were i d e n t i f i e d and dropped from the a n a l y s i s , learning effect  i n the s e r i e s were obtained  the  The r e s u l t s  of t h i s  c e r t a i n stimulus f a c t o r s  tions,  s e r i e s of experiments  ble,  of the lack of  indicate  may be q u i c k l y detected  Subject v a r i a b l e s , under such c o n d i -  and should be c o n t r o l l e d i n future s t u d i e s .  of experiments.  that  are important f o r maintaining p e r -  may be another confounding subject ies  such  at r i g h t angles i n the GGR t a r g e t .  ception i n s i m p l i f i e d stimulus c o n d i t i o n s . such as astigmatism,  strongest  on a target  as "GGR" which was used by More (1967), because intersecting  astigmatics  (Experiment F i v e ) .  Astigmatism would have no d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t  straight lines  then the  Attention  v a r i a b l e i n the present  However, apart from the astigmatism  ser-  varia-  perceptual l e a r n i n g has been demonstrated i n a s i m p l i f i e d  stimulus c o n d i t i o n .  REFERENCES  Barlow, H.B. Slippage of contact lenses and other a r t i f a c t s i n r e l a t i o n to f a d i n g and regeneration of supposedly s t a b l e r e t i n a l images. Q u a r t e r l y Journal of E x p e r i mental Psychology. 1963, 1_5, 36-51. Bennet-Clark, H.C, and Evans, C R . Fragmentation of patterned t a r g e t s when viewed as prolonged after-images. Nature. 1963, 199, 1215-1216. C l a r k e , F . J . J . A study of T r o x l e r ' s E f f e c t . 1960, 7, 219-236.  Optica Acta.  Clarke, F . J . J , and Belcher, 5.J. On the l o c a l i z a t i o n of T r o x l e r ' s E f f e c t i n the v i s u a l pathway. V i s i o n Research. 1962, 2, 53-68. Clarke, F . J . J , and Evans, C R . Luminous design phenomenon. 5cience. 1964, 144. 1359. Coombs, C H .  A theory of data.  Cowen, A. R e f r a c t i o n of the eye. F e r b i g e r , 1948.  New  York: Wiley,  1964.  P h i l a d e l p h i a : Lea  Donderi, D.C. V i s u a l disappearances Science. 1966, 152, 99-100.  caused by form  and similarity.  Donderi, D.C. and Kane, E. Perceptual l e a r n i n g produced by common responses to d i f f e r e n t s t i m u l i . Canadian Journal of Psychology. 1965, 1£, 15-30. Evans, C R . Some s t u d i e s of p a t t e r n perception using a s t a b i l i z e d r e t i n a l image. B r i t i s h Journal of Psychology. 1965, 5_6, 121-131. Evans, C R . Prolonged after-images employed as a technique f o r r e t i n a l s t a b i l i z a t i o n : some f u r t h e r s t u d i e s of pattern perception and some t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Autonomics D i v i s i o n , N a t i o n a l P h y s i c a l Laboratory, Teddingham, England. Auto 25. November, 1966. Evans, C R . and Drage, D.J. Some notes on apparatus used to produce a prolonged after-image f o r s t u d i e s of perfect r e t i n a l s t a b i l i z a t i o n . Autonomics D i v i s i o n . N a t i o n a l P h y s i c a l Laboratory, Teddingham, England. June, 1967. 35  36 References  (cont'd)  Evans, C R . and P i g g i n s , D.J. A comparison of the behavior of geometrical shapes when viewed under c o n d i t i o n s of steady f i x a t i o n , and with apparatus f o r producing a s t a b i l i z e d r e t i n a l image. B r i t i s h Journal of Physiol o g i c a l O p t i c s . 1963, 2CJ, 1-13. G r a n i t , R. Receptors and sensory p e r c e p t i o n . Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1955.  New  Haven:  Hart, J.T. Luminous f i g u r e s : i n f l u e n c e of point of f i x a t i o n on t h e i r disappearance. Science. 1964, 143. 1193-1194. Hays, W.L. S t a t i s t i c s for psychologists. Rinehart and Winston, 1963.  New  Hebb, D.O.  York: Wiley,  Organization of behavior.  New  York: Holt,  Hebb, D.O. The semiautonomous process: Its nature and American P s y c h o l o g i s t . 1963, 18_, 16-27.  1949. nurture.  Heckenmueller, E.G. S t a b i l i z a t i o n of the r e t i n a l image: A review of method, e f f e c t s and theory. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n . 1965, 63, 157-169. Hubel, D.H. and Wiesel, T.N. Receptive f i e l d s , b i n o c u l a r i n t e r a c t i o n and f u n c t i o n a l a r c h i t e c t u r e i n the cat's v i s u a l cortex. Journal of Physiology. 1962, 160, 106-154. Hubel, D.H. and Wiesel, T.N. Receptive f i e l d s and f u n c t i o n a l a r c h i t e c t u r e i n two n o n s t r i a t e v i s u a l areas (18 and 19) of the c a t . Journal of Neurophysiology. 1965, 28. 229-289. K e n d a l l , S.B. and Thompson, R.F. E f f e c t of stimulus s i m i l a r i t y , on sensory p r e c o n d i t i o n i n g within a s i n g l e stimulus dimension. Journal of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology, 1960, 53, 439-442. MacKinnon, G.E. Fading and regeneration of f i g u r e s varying in s i z e . Paper given to Canadian P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , Ottawa, 1967. McKinney, J.P. Disappearances 1963, 140, 403-404.  of luminous designs.  McKinney, J.P. Luminous design phenomenon. 144, 1359.  Science.  Science. 1964,  References  (cont'd)  37  McKinney, J.P„ Verbal meaning and perceptual s t a b i l i t y . dian Journal of Psychology. 1966, 20, 237-242.  Cana-  Melton, A.W. Implications of short-term memory f o r a general theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1963, 2, 1-21. M i l l e r , G.A. The magic number seven, plus or minus two: Some l i m i t s on our c a p a c i t y f o r processing i n f o r m a t i o n , P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review. 1956, 6_3, 81-97. More, L.K. E f f e c t of perceptual l e a r n i n g upon disappearances of luminous f i g u r e s . Unpublished M.A. T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1967. P r i t c h a r d , R.M., Heron, W. and Hebb, D.O. V i s u a l perception approached by the method of s t a b i l i z e d images. Canadian Journal of Psychology. 1960, 14, 67-77. R a t l i f f , R. and Riggs, L.A. Involuntary motions of the eye during monocular f i x a t i o n . J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology. 1950, 40, 687-701. Replogle, A. The e f f e c t s of s i m i l a r i t y on the behavior of perceived f i g u r e s . Paper given to Eastern P s y c h o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n , A t l a n t i c C i t y , 1962. Steinman, R.M. E f f e c t of target s i z e , luminance and colour on monocular f i x a t i o n . Journal of the O p t i c a l Society of America. 1965, 5_5, 1158-1165. Steinman, R.M., Cunitz, R.J., Timberlake, G.T. and Herman, M. Voluntary c o n t r o l of micro-saccades during maintained monocular f i x a t i o n . Science. 1967, 155. 1577-1579. Tees, R.C, The r o l e of f i e l d e f f e c t s i n v i s u a l p e r c e p t i o n . Undergraduate Research P r o j e c t s i n Psychology ( M c G i l l U n i v e r s i t y ) , 1961, .3, B7-96. Tees, R.C. and More, L.K. I d e n t i c a l f i g u r e s , exposure time and disappearance phenomena under reduced s t i m u l a t i o n c o n d i t i o n s . Psychonomic Science. 1966, 6_, 289-290. Thompson, R.F, E f f e c t of a c q u i s i t i o n l e v e l upon the magnitude of stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n across sensory m o d a l i t i e s . Journal of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology. 1959, 52, 183-185.  References cont'd  38  Thompson, R.F. Role of a s s o c i a t i o n cortex i n sensory preconditioning. Journal of Comparative and P h y s i o l o g i c a l Psychology. 1965,(a), 60, 166-191. Thompson, R.F. The neural basis of stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n . In Mostofsky, D.I. (Ed.): Stimulus g e n e r a l i z a t i o n . Stanford, C a l i f o r n i a : Stanford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1965(b), pp. 154-178. Underwood, B.J. and Schulz, R.W. learning. Philadelphia:  Meaningfulness and v e r b a l L i p p i n c o t t , 1960.  APPENDIX  Table  1-1  Frequency of Disappearances f o r Each Subject i n Each Category i n Experiment One Small Target  Target Shape  pPB  X  PBb  X  rRB  X  Conceptual  Large Target  Fixa-- Comtion plete  Shape  Concep.- F i x a tual tion  Complete  14 6 9 7 1 20 15 6 8 2  26 6 12 7 14 20 33 11 3 5  11 2 1 0 4 7 7 3 0 2  22 5 28 4 3 11 28 14 14 19  4 4 8 21 10 2 15 9 5 0  8.8  13.7  3.7  14.8  7.8  6.5  2.4  4.4  5 4 2 6 8 8 1 7 3 12  3 5  4 4 4 8 5 10 2 2 14 1  12 3 10 1 3 22 0 13 19 13  6 1 4 1 11 2 3 6 7 7  4 13 2 4 11 2 1 7  6 3 6 3 23 6 8 7 2 2  11 16 0 8 9 6 8 7 14 23  5  11 5 9 0 5 6 13  5 1 8 7 16 1 6 14 7 0  4 6  1 2 0 8 3 0 2 5 3 0  4 10 0 0 5 0 13 5 7 0  5.6  6.2  5.4  9.6  4.8  5.4  6.6  10.2  5 3 3 6 15 6 24 3 9 27  6 5 2 2 7 7 7 10 13 4  4 4 3 11 10 5 7 3 11 2  2 4 0 0 14 20 21 4 27 20  22 3 10 1 6 1 1 7 3 6  5 9 7 1 4 0 2 9 6 9  6 9 4 1 5 2 1 7 6 9  19 9 7 0 12 5  6.0  11.2  6.0  5.2  5.0  8.5  10.1  6.3  39  4  9 14 6  Appendix  cont'd  40  Table 1-1 cont'd Target  Small Shape  Total x  Conceptual  18 19 1 9 29 5 8 14 17 14  19 23 2 9 10 3 2 9 15 20  13.4  11.2  9.48  9.35  Large Target Fixation  Complete  16 15 0 0 4 2 1 8 8 6  11 10 8 10 16 9  Shape  36 14 38  2 14 16 8 11 9 1 8 10 4  6.0  16.0  8.3  5.28  12.9  6.73  8  Conceptual 8 4 4 3 8 8 6 6 8 6  Fixation 1 7 13 3 7 11 6 9 5 6  6.1  6.B  5.8  5.2  Complete 26 16 6 11 1 8 4 5 14 24 11.5 8.65  Appendix cont'd  41  Table 1-2 Summary Table f o r 2X4X80X2 A n a l y s i s at Variance i n Experiment One Source  SS  4422. 80 Subtotal 11. 02 Identity 4411. 80 E r r o r between 396. 90 Size 474. 28 Target Size-identity 6. 40 126. 27 Target-identity 105. 30 Size-target Target-size-iden112. 20 tity 511. 65 Error 6155. 80 Total  df 79 •1 78 1 3 1 3 3 3 66 159  F  Probability  0.19 51. 2 20. 39 0. 83 5. 43 4. 53  <.01 <..01  4. 82  <*01  < .01 <.01  Appendix cont'd  42  Table  2-1  Results of Experiment Group Small PPL  Large PPL 14 years  x Large PPL 20 years  x T o t a l large x  No. I d e n t i c a l Disappearances  Two  No. D i f f e r e n t Disappearances  No. F i x a t i o n Disappearances  No. Go Disapp  8 2 4 8 4 26 1 1 4 16 7.4  10 1 3 11 13 15 1 2 5 7 6.8  9 1 3 13 4 8 1 0 8 18 6.5  6 3 3 19 14 3 5 2 3 11 6.9  18 9 6 1 11 9.0 12 8 11 22 14 13.4  7 9 1 1 0 3.6 0 1 4 10 0 3.0  17 27 13 10 6 14.6 0 1 11 3 5 4.0  15 21 2 5 1 8.8 19 19 4 24 8 14.8  11.2  3.3  9.3  11.8  Appendix cont'd  43  Table 2-2 Summary Tables f o r One-Way ANQVA: Small PPL vs Large PPL on Four Measures  1.  I d e n t i c a l disappearances: Source SS Size 72.2 Error 884.0 Total 956.2  df 1 18 19  M.S. 72.2 49.1  F 1.47  Prob, N.S.  D i f f e r e n t disappearances: Source SS Size 61.25 Error 381.70 Total 442.95  df 1 18 19  M.S. 61.25 21.21  F 2.89  Prob, N.S.  3.  F i x a t i o n disappearances: Source SS Size 39.2 Error 920.6 Total 959.8  df 1 18 19  M.S. 39.2 51.14  4.  Complete disappearances: Source SS Size 120.05 Error 984.50 Total 1104.55  df 1 18 19  M.S. 120.05 54.69  F 2.19  Prob, N.S.  2,  44  Appendix cont'd  Table 2-3 Summary Tables f o r One-way ANOVA Between Age Groups f o r Large PPL on Four Measures I d e n t i c a l disappearances: SS Source Age 48.4 Error 269.2 Total 317.6  df 1 B 9  D i f f e r e n t disappearances: Source SS Age 0.9 Error 139.2 Total 140.1  df 1 8 9  M. S. 0. 9 17. 4  F 1  3.  F i x a t i o n disappearances: Source SS Age 280.9 Error 333.2 Total 614.1  df 1 8 9  M.S. 280.9 41.65  F 6.74  Prob. < .05  4.  Complete disappearances: Source SS Age 90.0 Error 591.6 Total 681.6  df 1 8 9  M.S. 90.0 73.95  F 1.22  Prob,  1.  M.S. 48.4 33.65  F 1.44  Prob,  Appendix  cont'd  45  Table Training SBKQFPLO BSPLOFY IMRSBPLUZR FYPLR SROPLIMWZ PLR CORKYPLZW XNPLK PLRVCKOWB CXPLK RQXFOPLH WPLJRH QPL OSPL KWRPLOZJQ PLBU ONSPLVFC RBPLO NJPLZX SQRNPL PLB QPL R5PLY CZPLJBQ WQPLR HUNFPLX OPLQRCX BXPLOVCK ZRQJPLSHK NYORKFBPL OFQKBS YFOSB RZUBSRN ZWNORS WZYKROC BWOKCVR HOFXQR QZJORWK CFVSNO XZJN QBJZC XFIWH  Slides  Used  in  3-1  Experiments  Three,  Four  and  Five  JPLVKR YNHPL UQPLKX QPLRZWJV ZFPLO PLS FQPLO KXRCJPLVY FPL NQPLWORZ UPLBJR QCUPL WYBPLSIM PLV CRXPLOJ JFVPLSZN XPL QPLZH UQPLRZ NPLORBWSK BXSFJPLH FPLS WNBPLQZJV UPLQWCO YNHPL50J QBUPLYS HKSRPLU NXPL WFPLKVHQC PLJUCB YVJCRXK ZROWQN RJBU NSBYW JOXRC NZSVFJ HZQ ZRQU KSWBRON HJFSXB VJZQBNW OCWQU  Appendix cont'd  46  Table 3-1 cont'd XCRQO KCVOXB KHSJQRZ BFKROYN RKVJ XKQU VJWZRQ OFZ  Note:  J05HNY SYUBQ URSKH CQHVKFW BCVJ 5BNFC XCRWQOK ORNSQCWH  - 60/100 s l i d e s contain an embedded "PL" - the l e t t e r "P" and "L" appear only once (together) i n the 60 s l i d e s and do not appear at a l l i n the remaining 40 s l i d e s .  Appendix cont'd  47  Table 3-2 Results of Experiment Three PPL Between-5 C o n t r o l Number Identical Disappearances 18 9 6 1  11 12 8 11 22 14  Number Different Disappearances 7 9 1 1 0 0 1 4 10 0  PPL Between-5 Learning Difference  11 0 5 0 11 12 7 7 12 14 7.9 22.5  Number Identical Disappearances 1 6 6 5 0 6 2 3 13 5  Number DifferDifferent ence Disappearances 3 8 2 1 16 7 0 9 3 3  -2 -2 4 4 -16 -1 2 -6 10 2 -0.5 43.9  Appendix cont'd  4B  Table  4-1  Results of the S c a l i n g Procedure used i n Experiment Four A  E  T  G  D  I  M  5 6 5 4 7 6 6  3 3 3 3 3 5 3  2 2 2 2 2 2 2  7 7 6 7 5 4 5  4 4 4 6 4 3 4  1 1 1 1 1 1 1  6 5 7 5 6 7 7  39  23  14  41  29  7  43  6 6 5  1 1 1  4 3 3  7 7 7  2 5 4  3 2 2  5 4 6  17  3  10  21  11  7  15  56  26  24  62  40  14  58  4 6 5 4  3 4 3 3  1 1 1 1  6 3 7 7  7 5 4 6  2 2 2 2  5 7 6 5  19  13  4  23  22  8  23  4 4 6 6 5 5  2 2 2 2 2 2  5 3 1 1 1 3  7 7 3 7 7 7  3 6 5 4 4 4  1 1 4 3 3 1  6 5 7 5 6 6  30  18  14  38  26  13  35  49  31  18  61  48  21  58  T o t a l 105  57  42  123  88  35  116  Total I #1  Total E #1 Total Gen .1  Total I #2  Total E #2 Total Gen. 2  Appendix  cont'd  49  Table 4-2 Disappearance Data f o r Experiment Four Group Target  Pre-training Number Identical  Control PPL  X Var. Gen. PPL  PPE X Var, Gen, PPL PPE  X Var.  Number Different  13 3 15 12 7 5 13 3 10 13  7 8 11 7 3 12 11 0 7 9  6 6 8 2 4 0 28 4 11 8  2 9 2 5 7 5 11 3 11 5  5 5 10 2 5 6 13 12 2 0  9 3 19 8 5 5 5 7 1 0  P o s t - t r a i n i ng Difference  6 -5 4 5 4 -7 2 3 3 4  Number Identical  Number D i f f e r Difference ent  Difference of Differences  14 5 25 10 6 2 24 1 9 10  8 7 11 10 10 23 22 3 8 7  6 -2 9 0 -4 -21 2 -2 1 3  0 -3 -5 5 8 14 0 5 2 1 2.7 27.61  4 -3 6 -3 -3 -5 17 1 0 3  9 4 11 6 2 7 29 5 4 10  0 10 6 9 5 6 10 5 6 3  9 -6 5 -3 -3 1 19 0 -2 7  -5 3 1 0 0 -6 -2 1 2 -4 -1 8.6  -4 2 -9 -6 0 1 8 5 1 0  8 5 9 1 13 0 14 13 10 0  1 2 19 2 6 1 5 9 1 1  7 3 -10 -1 7 -1 9 4 9 -1  -11 -1 1 -5 -7 2 -1 1 -8 1 -2.8 17.4  Appendix cont'd  50  T a b l e 4-3 Summary T a b l e f a r ANOVA i n E x p e r i m e n t F o u r Between t h e T h r e e G e n e r a l i z a t i o n L e v e l s Source Generalization Error Total  level  SS  df  157.27 551.70 708.97  2 27 29  I.5.  78.64 3.85 <.05 20.43  T a b l e 4-4 Trend A n a l y s i s f o r G e n e r a l i z a t i o n Experiment SS  bource Generalization Linear Quadratic Other Error Total  level  df  157.27 2 1 151.25 6.02 1 0 0.00 551.70 27 708.97 29  M.S.  151.25 7.40 <.025 6.02 1 0.00 20.43  Appendix cont'd  51 Table 5-1  Words Used i n "PL" T r a i n i n g with Task to Look f o r S p e l l i n g Mistakes i n Experiment Five Accomplish Sp. Shapley Sp. P l i t e Queen c Plankton Onyx c Steeple Navy c Hapless Plenty Mania c Hind c Maple Biplane Abode c Sp. Plenaay Simpleton Sample CSp. Abatt CSp. Spinach c . Bomb Sp. 5uplus Aplomb Staple Split Comply c-.\ Duke Sp. Pleasure CSp. K n i t t Explicit  Complight C Wahoo C Demon Sp. T i p l e t Plede Tattoo c Sp. Plimsoke Main c Explanation CSp. Beech Ample Sp. S u p l i c e Hoe c Sp. Aidplane Accomplice Canuck c Need c Sp. P l a i t Plants c . Abandon Deplete Simple Sp. Splut Complex c . Execute c . Incident Sp. Quaduplet c . Baboon Naples Sp. Heply  C C C C Sp. C c c c  Sp. c c c  Sp. c  Sp. c  Sp  c c  c  Sp. Note 5p = s p e l l i n g mistake C = c o n t r o l (no "PL"p a i r ) -60/100 words c o n t a i n an embedded "PL" -the l e t t e r s "P" and "L" appeal' only once (together) i n the 60 s l i d e s and not at a l l i n the remaining 40 c o n t r o l s l i d e s , -approximately 25% of the words contain s p e l l i n g errors.  c  Tandem Splash Acetone Homocide Quantum Couple Contemplat Ooknik Complete Make Deploy Youth Waive Doaplet Infinity Diamond Splice Knack Employ Beople Platform Fine 5ubple Ovation Temple Platted Take Complain Neuter Plymouth Duplex Zany Tample Splendid Accomplish Employee Net Topless Quintuplet Plum  Appendix cont'd  52 Table  5-2  Disappearance Data f o r the "Word" Group in Experiment Five 5  Pre-training No.Iden- No.Train. tical ing  1 2 3 4 5 6* 7 8 9 10* 11 12* 13 14 15 16* 17  10 16 20 8 6 7 8 9 2 8 34 28 10 1 8 5 4  * astigmatic  6 5 5 4 2 2 3 11 6 10 5 7 6 1 3 5 0 5_s  Differences  4 11 15 4 4 5 5 -2 -4 -2 29 21 4 0 5 0 4  Post-training No.Iden- No.Traintical ing  9 8 16 4 5 19 2 8 2 18 27 30 6 3 12 11 5  8 7 12 4 2 5 1 15 4 4 7 6 6 1 7 1 0  Differences  1 1 4 0 3 14 1 -7 -2 14 20 24 0 2 5 10 5  Difference of Differences 3 10 11 4 1 - 9 4 5 -2 -16 9 -3 4 -2 0 -10 -1  Appendix cont'd  53  Table  5-3  D i f f e r e n c e of b i f f e r e n c e s Over Time f o r Experiment Five A. Nonsense S y l l a b l e S t i m u l i 5  30  60  90  120  150  180  210  240  270  300  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  -2 0 -1 1 2 0 2 0 -3 ' 0  -3 1 -6 0 1 1 2 0 1 3  3 1 -2 1 1 1 4 1 -1 0  1 -1 -1 3 1 2 -2 0 0 1  1 -1 -2 0 -1 -1 2 0 2 -2  2 -1 -2 3 0 2 0 0 1 0  0 2 0 0 1 1 -3 2 0 -1  -1 0 0 -1 1 3 0 0 3 0  -1 -3 1 -1 1 3 -3 1 0 0  0 -1 2 -1 1 3 -3 1 -1 0  0 0  9 .9  4 .4  -2 -.2  5 .5  2 .2  5 .5  -2 -.2  1 .1  1 2 2 2 -2 -1 1 -3 -1 -3 0 2 -2 0 -3 0 -1  0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 -2 -3 -4 0 1 0 -1 -1 0  1 -1 3 0 1 -1 1 0 -1 -1 1 1 -1 0 1 -1 -1  -2 0 1 -1 1 -2 -1 2 -1 0 3 1 1 -1 2 -2 0  0 3 1 1 -1 0 0 1 1 -1 3 -4 -1 -1 -3 -6 0  0 0 0 1 1 -1 1 -1 -5 2 -2 1 -1 0 1 0  2 1 0 -1 0 2 -1 -3 1 -3 0 1 0 1 1 1 0  4 .31  4 .31  4 .31  3 .23  1 .08  -7 -1.75  1 .25  X X  -1 -.1  B.  Word S t i m u l i  1 2 3 4 5 6* 7 8 9 10* 11 12* 13 14 15 16* 17 X  X  -1 2 3 1 0 -1 1 1 3. -1 1 -1 1 0 0 0 0 12 .92  4 3 0 0 0 -1 -1 2 0 0 2 -2 2 0 1 -2 0  -2 0 1 1 1 -4 1 4 -1 0 1 1 2 0 2 0 1 11 .85  13 -4 1.00 -.31  -2 -.15  _X* -3 -3 -5 -4 -2 -2 X -•.75 - .75 -1.25 -.50 -1.00 -.50 * astigmatic  Ss  -3 -11 -.75 -•2.75  Ql  EXHIBIT ONE QUESTIONNAIRE USED IN EXPERIMENT  FOUR  NAME (please p r i n t ) In each of the questions below, you w i l l see a l e t t e r set a p a r t , and a f t e r t h i s l e t t e r you w i l l see several other l e t t e r s . For example: B C • F  H  J  K  For each of the questions below, please rank order the group of l e t t e r s in terms of t h e i r s i m i l a r i t y to the l e t t e r set a p a r t . For example, i f , in the above example, you think that the "H" i s the most s i m i l a r l e t t e r to "B" of the f i v e l e t t e r s , you would put a "I" under the " H " . S i m i l a r l y , you would put a " 2 " under the l e t t e r which was next most s i m i l a r to " B " and so on u n t i l you put a " 5 " under the l e t t e r which i s least s i m i l a r to " B " . Your answer to the above example would look l i k e the f o l l o w i n g i f you thought that "H" was most s i m i l a r to " B " , then " K " , then "C", then " F " , and f i n a l l y " J " was the least s i m i l a r to "B". B C  F  H  3  4  1  J 5  K 2  You would then go on to the next question, using the same procedure. Do not look at the questions you have already answered or change your answers. L I.  A  E  T  G  D  I  M  I  M  D  D  G  M  A 2.  G  T  L  E  T 3.  A  I  E  L  NAME  Page 2  (please print)  D  L  I  T  G  E  A  A  M  L  D  G  T  M  I  E  A  L  T  D  G  A  L  E  I  M  T  T  D  M  I  8.  L  A  E  G  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0104328/manifest

Comment

Related Items